linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/7] tracing: timer: Add deferrable flag to timer

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 21 May 2015 08:18:37 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Badhri Jagan Sridharan <badhri@...gle.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] tracing: timer: Add deferrable flag to timer_start


* John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org> wrote:

> From: Badhri Jagan Sridharan <badhri@...gle.com>
> 
> The timer_start event now shows whether the timer is
> deferrable in case of a low-res timer. The debug_activate
> function now includes deferrable flag while calling
> trace_timer_start event.

s/now includes deferrable flag/
  now includes a deferrable flag

s/calling trace_timer_start event/
  calling the trace_timer_start event

>  TRACE_EVENT(timer_start,
>  
> -	TP_PROTO(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires),
> +	TP_PROTO(struct timer_list *timer,
> +		unsigned long expires,

This isn't compat safe, should any tooling rely on this.

I see it's a mistake in prior code:

> +		unsigned int deferrable),
>  
> -	TP_ARGS(timer, expires),
> +	TP_ARGS(timer, expires, deferrable),
>  
>  	TP_STRUCT__entry(
>  		__field( void *,	timer		)
>  		__field( void *,	function	)
>  		__field( unsigned long,	expires		)
>  		__field( unsigned long,	now		)

which should probably be fixed as well.

> @@ -650,7 +650,8 @@ static inline void
>  debug_activate(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires)
>  {
>  	debug_timer_activate(timer);
> -	trace_timer_start(timer, expires);
> +	trace_timer_start(timer, expires,
> +		tbase_get_deferrable(timer->base));

why is this line broken? If you put it into a single line it's still 
below 80 cols, so there's really no reason for it.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/